I have nothing against Christmas in school. I like to think of it as a tradition, even if religious. I enjoy it, participate in it and do think it's pretty over the top to get rid of all signs of it in school. But I can certainly understand some folks that think such activity IS promoting a religion in public school because it is doing that. Not having Christmas in school does not mean you can't have your Christmas practice. Not having Diwali (major Hindu festival) in school does not mean Hindu cannot have their Diwali practice.
Really, since educators like mclawson are so worried about losing valuable class time to pointless exercises of first amendment rights, why not just eliminate the entire Christmas break and be done with it? It's not like anyone but Christians actually have reason to celebrate it, so let's just eliminate it altogether and make up for that lost time, eh?
Because really, if a school system allows a Christmas break and ignores other religious holidays, aren't hey endorsing that particular religion? Just following the logic where it leads, here.
And just to preempt the "but it's taken on a non-religious significance, so we should keep it" argument... Er, no, not if you are going to remain logically consistent in your argument. If your argument is that allowing private individuals to pray during the day is an endorsement of a particular religion, then how is the school system giving a religious holiday off not endorsement? And if you're really worried about equal protection, why are students not getting Kwaanza off? Or select days in Ramadan? It's Christmas. Not Muhammadmas. Not Buhddamas, Not Vishnumas. it's Christmas. It is a time for celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, who we believe to be our Lord and Savior. It is not a secular holiday, it is as religious a holiday as can be outside of Easter. If you don't believe that erecting a nativity scene is appropriate for this particular holiday then that con really only mean that you don't feel that the Holiday should be celebrated (again, cue the "but it's taken on a non-religious significance, so we should keep it" arguments - which really just translate into "well, I really want to take that break..."). So, what'll it be? Abolish the Christmas break - and every other religiously inspired holiday? Or take your breaks when you can get them? What say you libs?
^There's debate among Christians of what Christmas means today as opposed to what it should really mean. If a putting up bunch of plastic idols float your boat or that it rustles your jimmies that you can't put it up in a public area, maybe that's not what Christ intended. Not when it comes to politics or religion. Which is why we don't generally air that **** out at work either.
Really? You believe the freedom to express yourself as a Muslim in America is equally protected as the freedom to be a Christian?
Under the law, yes. In practice, no. But it should be. Remove protections for Christians, and where do you think the Muslims will end up? Those protections need to extend to everyone.
Everyone expresses themselves in different ways. Are you the judge of their piety? Not when it comes to politics or religion. Which is why we don't generally air that **** out at work either.[/QUOTE] So I will chalk you up to another "remove all religion from public life" vote. Unsurprising, and nothing new is learned. Except that you believe your countrymen to be unable to make good choices.
Rabid atheist? Because I don't want your religion stuffed down my throat? You got to be kidding me if you think having a baby Jesus on school property isn't an endorsement of religion by the gov't and not right. I think you fail to see that this is a secular country where the rights of everyone - including atheists are to be respected. No one is stopping you from expressing yourself. You can put a nativity scene on your private property. And you can pray whenever you want. If a kid wants to pray in class fine he can do that, but not everyone has to wait for him, instruction should go on. No moment of silence. Lunch is 30 minutes, plenty of time for you to pray there. But if Chem is 60 minutes it's not really 58 minutes and 2 minutes for Christians to pray. I don't think you understand the constitution as it was intended, you are interpreting in a way that justifies your wants, not the way the founding fathers or the Supreme Court has interpreted it. I will go with what they have said.
No protections are being removed. You have every rights to your religion. You aren't entitled to have your religion "showcased" (sorry for a lack of better word) to everyone in public school or government places.
Lots of non Christians celebrate Christmas for reasons that have nothing to do with Christianity. So what? We'll call it the Winter break from now on to satisfy your consistency issue. Spring Break, Summer Break, Winter Break. And yes, we can eliminate Easter and Good Friday as school recognized holidays right now. Wow, that was a tough one. And you're not talking about praying "during the day", you're talking about setting aside time in the classroom to conduct a moment of silence so they can pray. As if they're unable to do that on their own time at any point in the day they so choose. Hardly the same thing.
My point is that that people express themselves in different ways. It's just that there are too many ways to express different ideologies and opinions way beyond my assumptions or yours. For the second point, I tend to react negatively when people feel the need to express their piety at a public arena through superficially symbolic gestures. Not everyone believes the same as you do. Not everyone is tolerant with other peoples incursion on their personal life decisions. I would say it's inconsiderate to force people to sit through one particular group's ritual practices, such as during a publicly funded game or in school. Should we wait for Muslim students to pray towards Mecca out of their 5 daily occasions? Should school cafeterias cater to non-pork-beef-meat diets for their respective students? And you've chalked it up wrong. Maybe that discussion about what makes you warm and fuzzy about God shouldn't be pigeonholed into symbolic and sometimes polarizing gestures. The Ten Commandments is offensive to atheists and polytheists such as Hindus. But if by "public life" you mean Government grounds, then HELL YES. Know your neighbor. Love your co-worker. Get to know them better. Nothing you've mentioned goes against that and sharing your personal relation with God to others. It's just that when you take what you've written up as a political prop, it becomes Much Much Harder to do that. It depersonalizes the issue and removes it far away from people or even God.
No one is stuffing anything down your throat. No one is forcing you to do anything, no one is forcing you to participate. YOU are the one who is trying to force something down someone's throat. YOU are trying to restrict someone's freedom under the 1st Amendment. Your freedoms are perfectly intact and you run no risk of being forced to live under a Christian (or other religious) system. You are, however, trying to force an atheistic existence upon those who believe otherwise. Again, reference the Soviet Union and China for examples of how this tends to turn out. Setting up a nativity display is in NO WAY and attempt to try to force you to accept a religion that you do not subscribe to. Again, the fact that you think it is only tells us more about you and your own insecurities. It's CHRISTMAS. It's a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, and the significance of His arrival. If you don't agree then fine, but why do you feel the need to fu&k it up for those of us who do? Those nativity scenes do zero damage to you, and they are not meant to influence you in any way. But you can't take the sight of it... vampires and crosses. Me personally? No. Others? Yes, most certainly. Er, no, I can't, at least not if you're at the helm and I'm on public property. So we can make accommodations for the 5% or so of kids who are disabled, but not the 90% or so who want to exercise their right to freedom of religious exercise? Nice. Fantastic logic there. In my experience most schools take a minute or two of silence during homeroom when they are preparing for the day in general. I did not see anything disruptive about it, and I don;t think it is a ding on productivity. Some students operate better after having had it. LOL, a Lefty saying this to me? :grin: It's a Limiting document at its core. This is what libs such as yourself have never understood. Your rights are God-given - or "natural-born", if you prefer that term. You are born with them. Government does not grant you rights, and government cannot take them away - unless you let it. That is WHY we have a Constitution. It restricts the government from taking away or infringing upon your natural rights. The day you understand that concept is the day you move from becoming a tool of the socialist elite who call themselves "liberals" and become a responsible citizen who understands what freedom actually is.
And they should be allowed to do so. So, the "It's too complicated, the logistics are too difficult" argument trumps the "It's their Constitutional right" argument then? I shudder to think what this means for our 4th Amendment rights, then. Yes, I know. Vampires and crosses. Your irrational reaction to others engaged in prayer should have no bearing on their right to engage in prayer. I know that, it's why I believe in making allowances for expression of individual belief. That's human nature. Let me know when you find a cure for it. The fact that you find "Thou shalt not kill" and such offensive says more about your own mindset than my own. By your own admission you don't want to see it anywhere. the sight of people praying apparently send you into convulsions or something. Public life means, to me, anything outside of your home. Close enough. You're almost a Christian now! (kidding)
But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. Matthew 6:6.
I think in alot of cases, it's not. Some people have a reflexive reaction against it. I was an atheist for a few years. The reaction I had to people of faith was pretty much reflexive. It was automatic. I had an idea about the absolute failure of religion to explain what I was seeing in my life and my inclination towards critical thought led me to believe in God's nonexistence. Fast forward about 15 years and I have changed my thinking... But I get the response. It's reflexive, nonthinking. I get the horror that atheists feel when contemplating a deity. I've had those thoughts myself. Based upon your posts in this threat I am willing to say it doesn't apply to you. But it probably does to some others in this thread.
